Saturday, May 25, 2013

Sometimes,
I write fanfiction. Off and on. I’ll go through a dry spell of months
or even years, and then the urge hits me again. It might go away when I
go pro, it might not. I don’t hate myself for doing it at all, though
for me it’s become a more private activity since the early 2000s.

It's
very difficult for a casual insider to distill fanfiction, and other
creative fannish activities, into purely objective terms so that others
can understand why they do them. I'm not very deeply absorbed into the
creative aspects of fannish culture, but I'm inside it enough that on
some level, creative fannish activities (fanfiction, fanart, cosplay,
and whatever) are hard to put into concrete terms, and especially to
imagine as something bizarre or strange. They simply are, such an accepted part of my landscape that I can’t imagine them not existing.

So
I'm not going to try to define a universal motive behind writing
fanfiction or other creative fannish activities; I just want to talk
about my own experiences with fanfiction (since my involvement with
other fannish creative projects is almost nil), and what I think drives
me to indulge in it.

My
involvement with fannish creativity probably reached its peak in the
Transformers fandom, which was my first entry into “fan culture”. During
that time, I would actually read fanfiction, think of my own original
characters and settings, and discuss fanfiction with others.

However,
my interests in these things whittled away, until I only wanted to deal
with offical materials and characters, wrote fanfiction only sparingly,
and never read any other fanfiction unless a friend wrote it. I lost
touch with the community around fanfiction, too. I don’t regret what I
did in the past, but that simply isn’t where my interests are anymore.

Yet
when I look back, I understand that my motivations behind these fannish
activites have largely gone unchanged. I try to keep a leash on things,
to not totally disregard what I think are the rules of "good" writing,
but fanfiction is still a self-indulgent activity regardless of how prim
and proper I try to make myself, and I’m comfortable with that.

The
quote "write what you want to write" is still a useful rule for
writers, but writing fanfiction lets you put all this into overdrive.
When you write fanfiction, you are writing a version of other peoples'
stories that you want to see. You privately paste your own preferences and desires over somebody else’s work, which is a big self-indulgence.

My
major reason for writing fanfiction is one of the best examples of
fanfic's self-indulgent nature: I’ll end up preferring a minor
character and want to write a story exploring them further. I prefer to
do this with "side stories", pieces that don't actually upset the
canonical character hierarchy but simply tell stories that happen while
the main characters are off doing something else.

The
thought of actually treating my favourite secondary characters like the
protagonists makes me cringe. I still feel like I should respect those
canon hierarchies, even if it seems contradictory to want to, when I
write stories about the characters I like, rather than the ones the
narrative intends me to focus the most on. I don’t only prefer minor
characters, and don’t want to write stories about every minor character I
enjoy, but it just happens sometimes

A
good springboard for a story can be the desire to "fix" things in a
character's life. If I feel they got an unfinished arc or a bad ending, I
sometimes want to write a story to see what else could have happened,
what else could be done. Or I may simply want to see what lies ahead for
them in life.

However,
something like this is risky. Original fiction writers are taught, and
rightly, to not play favourites with their characters, or to spoil any
one of them. There's just something so saccharine about the idea of
giving your favourite character all they want, like eating too much
sugar at once.

Furthermore,
perfect stories make for boring stories, and boring characters. So,
whenever I realize I want to write a story about giving a character more
than what they've gotten, I feel like I'm juggling a flask of
nitroglycerine.

To
assure myself, I try to give the characters what we're told to give our
original creations: make them suffer, make their mistakes, and don't
give them everything. I try to know what these characters' weaknesses
are, and extrapolate on them. Pragmatism makes a good artist, and too
much sugar can spoil the sweetness of the story. To treat my favourite
characters as if they were innocent makes me wince. I won’t even use the
term “woobie” to describe a pathetic character that I feel for, since
they are not innocent even if they are sympathetic.

Doing
these things are a way to work out small frustrations, rather than
create viable replacements. This doesn’t erase the issue I had with the
official story. I am totally baffled when I see fanfiction considered
equivalent to canon, or “better than canon”. Canon is always better,
simply because it’s canon.

Another
reason why fanfic is self-indulgent is that I can go hog-wild with
sequels and story lengths. I don't have to worry about whether I’m
writing a novel, novella, or short story. I don't have to worry about
whether I’m wearing out characters, or if my new story "really" needs to
be told. I've declared myself finished with a storyline, only to want
to go back to it again and again because I can’t stop myself; fanfiction
is just addictive. While this all can make for crappy writing, it’s
also liberating.

Original
writing is certainly more fulfilling and satisfying for me, but I also
get the fanfiction bug because fanfiction allows for a mental break.
Sure, there are unique challenges that come with writing fanfiction, but
I nonetheless find myself able to write it with ease, to automatically
extend less effort but still be satisfied with the results.

Even
though I try for reasonable plotting, and loyalty to the character's
voices, writing fanfiction is still easier than original fiction, and
doing it lets me recharge mental batteries. Writing fanfiction is
coloured with this sense of unbridled passion plus laziness.

I've
also been a shipper. I try to approach that like I do everything else: I
create conflict, I don't spoil my characters, and don't give them
everything. In this case, I also don't expect the stuff I come up with
to be shown in canon, or put too much energy into defending the pairing
to others, not that I've ever had to.

But
shipping can be a rich source of character development. I try to set up
little challenges for myself as a fanfic writer, to create something
that stretches the narrow boundaries I've set up for myself and try to
make it work, and sometimes shipping can be just what I need.

I
want my final product to feel like it's "just enough", close enough to
canon that I can feel satisfied in my own subjective way. Of course, no
fanfic can be exactly the same as canon, but I still seek out that sense
of “just enough”, that these characters still sound and act just
familiar enough that I still feel I've done them a decent, if strange,
tribute.

All
of this adds up to a writing sensibility that is very vanilla. I know
that accuracy and fidelity is subjective, and so are obscenity levels,
but my stuff probably doesn't match up with the mistaken perception of
fanfiction as outrageous in terms of content rather than concept. I play
it "safe", I suppose, but you can’t call it “playing” when it’s what
you want to do.

Such
a state doesn’t make me better than anybody else. All fanfic writers
are freaks, all of us are self-indulgent and screwing around. Sometimes I
see some character interpretations that I disagree with on various
terms, or things that do personally disturb me, but I don't want to see
people stop writing these things, and I don’t want to form an angry mob.
This is just how fandom goes. It’s better to assume that fandom will
write anything, before you find out. It’s just a way of life.

I
have written fanfiction for few properties, while having no urge to
write fanfiction for others. Despite being comfortable with writing
fanfiction, I view it on some levels as a matter of respect, and if I
respect a piece of fiction deeply, I'm less likely to write fanfiction
for it, because I feel like it’d be like a peon trying to be a noble.

It
also happens because a well-written work has less gaps to fill, and
less unexplored angles, so fanfiction would be harder, if not
impossible, especially those small, out-of-the-way stories I prefer. If a
character has a complete story, with an ending that was powerful or
conclusive, I see no need to tell more about them.

This
all means I can usually predict with some regularity which canons will
inspire me to write fanfic and which will not, but exceptions could be
waiting in the future.

Fanfiction
isn’t anything bad. It’s harmless to the original work., because
fanfiction automatically is a smaller thing than canon. Legally it may
be in a grey area, but ethically, I don't find fanfiction problematic.
The argument that a bad adaptation doesn't hurt the original is equally,
or even more, applicable to fanfiction. It’s just amateurs having some
fun. If it helps us as writers, great. If it doesn’t, also great.

I
do make a personal distinction between professionally written and
guided licensed stories and fanfiction written by casual amateurs,
though I know they come from the same wellspring. The guiding hand of
the licensor or a professional sensibility can make a lot of difference
since, when it's written for personal reasons, fanfiction can be
tremendously, wonderfully self-indulgent.

So,
I see fanfiction as a way to pay tribute to a thing I enjoy, and to
give my writing-brain a rest. I try to do good work, but know it’s
fundamentally decadent. And whenever I see a piece of professional media
described as "like fanfiction", that's what I picture: a work that
charges forward with something just because "it's cool", and restraint
be damned.

I
am so, so lazy. I told myself I’d get caught up on the IDW Teenage
Mutant Ninja Turtles series before this thing came out, but I never got
around to that. I still know some plot details of the IDW comic, and
will, *will* get around to reading the whole thing eventually, but I
went in anyway. Not completely cold, but I won’t pretend I’ve actually
read the preceding comics.

It’s
a good little story, telling a complete tale and setting up a future.
It’s a present-day tale of IDW Stockman being deceptive with his mad
science run amok, interspersed with flashbacks of Stockman playing chess
with his father at different times in his life. In the end Stockman
seems to outwit Krang and gather important data in preparation for
usurping his master, because Stockman wants control of the impending
Technodrome. Not to rule the world, but to control and distribute the
technology for his own purposes.

Well-played, Stockman.

There’s
always a “but” and my problem is that, though the storytelling is
competent and it whets the appetite for more, there’s something about
the comic that feels cold and detached. I don’t know what it is, but it
doesn’t make me want to run out and buy all the IDW comics yet.
Something’s missing, and I don’t know what.

I
used to think that Baxter Stockman was one of the recurring TMNT
characters that wasn’t bound into a strict archetype--he started out as a
simple (but likely tongue-in-cheek) portrayal of a mad scientist, but
his animated versions pretty consistently embody failure beyond just
“curses foiled again”, and an arrogance beyond typical villainy.

But
IDW Baxter seems to embody that particular arrogance mentioned above,
and he could be headed for failure, so perhaps Stockman’s other media
portrayals have simply become the archetype, leaving the original Mirage
incarnation to be more the exception than the rule..

Yet
IDW Stockman is also distinct because his moments of fear and
henchmanly submission are an apparent ruse, AND he has larger villainous
ambitions that seem to have survived for a long time, instead of
degenerating into simply surviving and getting revenge on things. I
support this only as a means of making different versions of the
character distinct; I don’t think Baxter Stockman “needs” to have more
villainous oomph, because I don’t mind if he fails at supervillainy as
long as he’s an entertaining character. But Stockman shouldn’t be the
same every time, and for this I praise IDW.

I
liked that his father isn’t simply the harsh dad cliche: he seemed
strict and sometimes contradictory, but believed he was doing good.
Though Baxter, being the lovable asshole that he is, repays in kind by
booting Mr. Stockman out of his own company in the final flashback.

And
yes, we get the “flyborg”, the experiment that Baxter uses to stage a
rampage / diversion as part of his plan, with a potential army waiting
in green tanks. I’m not saying I’m “too cool” for Easter Eggs, but
something about this one made me cringe. I’m in favour of using
transformation to represent Baxter Stockman’s failure, but I don’t think
it *needs* to happen to him all the time. I didn’t even need a homage.

It’s
also so obviously an Easter Egg it hurts. If you want to fuse an insect
with a robot for offensive purposes, why choose a common housefly? Why
not something stronger, more armoured?

Also,
while I wouldn’t bet the whole farm on it, I assume this means that
Baxter Stockman will remain human in the IDW-verse, which I’d prefer. I
love Baxterfly and Baxterborg, but there’s a world of possibilities out
there for the character, even if you want to keep him embodying failure
and self-destruction. Baxter Stockman still isn’t as set in stone as
some other TMNT characters, and writers should take advantage of that.

Besides
not clamouring for Stockman to be transformed, I find it a
little...silly to see the IDW comic continuously bringing elements
exclusive to the old cartoon into a more serious universe. I giggle
every time I see a picture of the gritty gun-toting Neutrinos, or that
steampunk-ish homage to Krang’s android body. Believe me, I know
concepts can be remade into anything, but I can’t help it. It’s a side
effect of being tired of the TMNT fandom’s urge to deny or bypass the
original cartoon’s wonderful / painful silliness. It just makes me think
of dopey fanboys who are secretly insecure about the things they like,
and want to prove these things are “gritty and adult”.

Mea culpa.

Also,
I still love the main cover for this issue. The variant cover, with
Baxter playing “chess” with figures of the characters, is pretty trite
compared to the excellent play on M.C. Escher’s “Hand with Reflecting
Sphere.”

Whenever
I see it being said that we need less bitchy heroines, less heroines
who reject traditional femininity, so that we can uplift the reputation
of femininity (not femaleness) in western culture, it stinks like gender
essentialism.

Apparently
it's not enough to want society to value the feminine: the feminine
must also be the strict concern of female characters, even though female
and feminine are not the same thing. Nobody ever asks whether male
heroes should be more feminine, whether they should be more than just
"badass" and have their soft side. We only ask this in relation to
female characters.

This
ignores the heavy prices still paid in stepping out of one's gendered
role, and the fact that femininity is still the norm, still an
obligation for women. To disparage a female character for not being
"womanly" enough, we forget that everyone else does that to real people,
real women, every day.

It's
similar to the way discussions of female stereotypes in media are
derailed by posters asking, "but why do you hate feminine things?" They
miss the point, maybe to troll, maybe deliberately. It’s not that
femininity is hated, just that it’s not a choice for many women. When a
way of being and acting is not framed as a choice but a duty, then it's
touchier to defend, and you can't act like it's all a choice.

All
of this wouldn't be an issue if the strict equation wasn't between
feminine and female. If we asked to value feminine traits in male and
female characters, it would sound less like fandom is trying to push
women back into the box that society made.

Calling
a heroine a "bitch" or a "man with breasts" is still about the idea
that there is a way to be a "good woman", or an essential femaleness
that can be overridden by a female character acting "wrong" way. It's
policing female characters as much as calling them "weak" for being
feminine is.

I've
also never really seen a female character as totally masculine as
everyone seems to be describing. They always have some feminine traits,
though one's view of what makes a character feminine or masculine
changes with the person.

In
a world where merely being assertive is still enough to get women
called a "bitch", I'm suspicious of any claim that abrasive, unpleasant
heroines are some kind of epidemic. Are they, or are our standards for
female behaviour in characters still too high?

I
am not comfortable with hating heroines for not being feminine enough,
or considering positive and feminine female characters the only way to
help femininity. Gender is not sex, and if calls for positive
representations of femininity are restricted to female characters, I
won't get behind any of this.

Friday, May 10, 2013

Since my friend Greg brought this post about turning Yellow Peril villains green in modern cartoon adaptations to erase their racism in a very strange fashion, and I figured I'd make a few additions.The first is something I noted when this first appeared on Tumblr, but now I've added some pictures:We all know Mentok from the oldschool Adult Swim show Harvey Birdman: Attorney at Law (and if you don't, you ought). Like nearly all of the characters he was originally from Hanna-Barberra's more obscure stable, specifically one of the original Birdman's many supervillains. But, uh, original Birdman cartoon footage was used to make the cartoon "Turner Classic Birdman" and I can't help but see some Yellow Peril influence in Mentok's design.

The At Law version looks like this:

I can't help but think, you know, somebody participated in this tradition. Maybe by accident.The original entry also mentioned "Lizard" Ming, and I immediately recognized that. Why? Because he was part of a rebooted "hip" Flash Gordon cartoon that I used to watch religiously in 1996. I caught re-runs a few years later, and realized it was terrible. This realization didn't come from any loyalty to the original Flash Gordon strips: I still know only the vaguest things about Flash Gordon, and could never get worked up over Dale and Flash being belly-shirted teenagers and probably a lot of other Radical-isms I'm forgetting.I perfectly understand why I liked it as a younger kid: it was full of bright colours and crazy monsters, and Thundra and Sulfa were two great characters, likely the product of the series trying to be progressive in other ways (Dale Adren was more active than I hear she used to be, Thundra used to be a male character, and the Hawkmen were made black). But time goes on.Anyway, Lizard Ming:

Yeah, check that out.I apologize for the quality, but the series seems to have almost no presence online, and I quickly snapped that from a YouTube movie of the opening. Here's the entire opening (with French credits, but the theme itself is an instrumental, and is actually kinda rockin'):Nothing else to say, really. The "greenwashing" works better when the character is technically an alien, but it still leaves a bad taste.

Wednesday, May 8, 2013

I was flipping through channels and caught the majority
of "Gay Purr-ee", an animated film that seems to be almost forgotten.
I was vaguely aware of its existence, but never sought it out.

It's good: predictable and a little unintentionally disturbing,
but a good way to kill an hour and some. It's surprising to see that there was
a non-Disney American cartoon film made in the sixties (this time by UPA and
Warner Brothers), even if it's very close to the Disney stereotype.

The plot hinges on a certain chain of scummy storytelling
conventions: the kitty heroine who first thinks herself too good for her humble
home, and too good and for the romantic attentions of the protagonist, only to
be swindled and hurt in the big city, and realize the country boy was right for
her after all. I didn't like the film enough to feel guilty about this, nor
hate it enough to be really angry.

The style of the artwork and animation is fun, and makes
it distinct from Disney at least on that level. Abstracted backgrounds and
minimalistic art makes it fun to look at. The character animation is of course
similar to the Warner Brother's shorts, and so not as distinct, but I still like
it.

And yes, this is a musical. The song, "The Money Cat",
which is used to seduce the Judy Garland-voiced Mewsette into following the villain
Meowrice to alleged fame and sophistication, has been in my head all day. It's
insanely catchy.

But furthermore, I love, love the animation on Meowirce's
minions. I'd normally be bored with minions being literally faceless, interchangeable
characters, but their antics are so entertaining that I love 'em. Their
silhouetted designs are also charming, and probably the most distinct-looking
characters in the film.

So no, I don't think it's a "forgotten gem",
besides the novelty factor and a few great visuals, but "Gay Purr-ee"
is pretty good.

I don't think that makes me a better person, 'cause I've spent plenty of energy complaining about changes made to the Zentradi of Macross and other junk, and I don't regret that 'tall. If you don't get too fanatical about it, a dislike of changes to media adaptations is not something to necessarily be "above".

It's just that in this case, I can't feel any irritation, first because the movie is its own separate thing and won't have any tangible impact on other versions of the franchise. I can cut it away like a diseased part if I want to.

I know Michael Bay more by reputation than by direct viewing, 'cause it sounded like watching his movies would be a waste of time. I saw the first Transformers film, it was pretty boring (I was / am a huge TF fan, but again, it was its separate thing from the many versions of the franchise), and that kind of frat-boy action-movie stuff I don't have a taste for. Which further helps me to ignore what's going on with this film.

And I can't help but say it--if my favourite characters in the franchise are a (usually) black guy, and a (usually) rat who acts like a Japanese guy, then I especially want to ignore whatever Michael Bay would do with them, so that's further incentive.

To round out this post, I guess I'll have to confess that I'm also not that into the Nicktoons Turtles series. It's getting to the point where, and I don't say this lightly, I feel a little guilty: like, where is my sense of humour or my appreciation for entertaining action?

But it's just not doing it for me. I can't think of anything that really pisses me off, though I have some negative opinions—but it's just that I've never yet been deeply drawn into the comedy or the drama of this series. I enjoy its interpretations of Splinter and Baxter, my favourite characters, but they're not as compelling as other versions, and none of the other cast members rise to take their place. Yes, I know how much fans love Nicktoons Splinter, and he's fine, but he's not setting my world on fire.

I've seen every episode except for "Karai's Vendetta" which I still have to get to right now. It's not that I expected it all to be anything like the other eleven billion versions of the Turtles already there, that's for sure not the problem.

Monday, May 6, 2013

This is a review of the third Rebuild of Evangelion film, Evangelion 3.0, 3.33, Q, Quickening, or "You Can [Not] Redo". There are spoilers, so hold off if you haven't seen it.

I've sort of been missing out on the Rebuild of Evangelion party these past few years, simply because, despite being a huge fan of Evangelion, the Rebuild movies didn't click with me. I didn't hate them or anything, but the spark wasn't there. They felt choppy, and like they skimmed the surface of a deeper story. And yes, I did get the vague feeling that they were trying to pander to certain anime stereotypes rather than create broken characters who might feel like anime stereotypes.

At the same time, I didn't view Rebuild 1.0 and Rebuild 2.0 was such a radical departure from the series.

But I really got into the groove with this film. It hit that sweet spot of being familar yet new, exciting yet comfortable (for a very strange definition of "comfortable", I'll admit), and seemed more imaginative and engaging.

Instead of the action-oriented fare of the first two Rebuild films, this was a slow build-up to a climax. There was plenty of action, but the real meat of the story procedeed slowly, as Shinji "adjusts" to the new world that he finds himself in.

Shinji's rescuing of Rei Ayanami from inside the Angel Zeruel caused a...proto-Third Impact that was halted by Kaworu literally falling from the sky in an new Evangelion. Shinji himself has been in a coma for the following fourteen years, drifting in space, entombed in EVA-01. The Children appear not to have aged, but everything else has changed. Misato, Ritsuko, and the bridge crew head up an independent organization called "Wille", which also employs Toji's sister Sakura. They all tell Shinji not to pilot the EVA, and he's also been outfitted with a collar that prevents synchronization and could kill him if activated. Shinji can't do much anyway, since Eva-01 now forms the core of the Wunder, Wille's flying fortress.

But Rei in Eva-00 breaks in and takes Shinji to NERV, run by a Gendo (sporting Khiel-like goggles) and a very weary and balding Fuyutski. Kaworu is there, and forms a bond with Shinji, while Shinji notices that the Rei who is also there is...not quite right. The world around them has been destroyed and distorted, though it is also still and quiet. There might be a chance to change the world back to the way it was, but it also might play into the hands of the still-scheming Gendo.

In terms of its plot and setting, Evangelion 3.33 is radically different from what has come before, which seems to have confused and upset a lot of people. I'm not bragging here, but I was genuinely excited by the new setting and content to watch it be explained further. Several of the series beats are repeated in different forms: a Shinji who has lost everything; a returning Rei who is now distant and confused; Shinji's bonding with Kaworu and the "breakup"; a journey underground; a battle between EVA-02 and Shinji. Some of the lines are even the same or similar, if you allow for differences in translation. It's an elegant way to do a remake, one that's satisfying.

And my god, the visuals. Granted, an expanded low-level digital video can't get me the crisp picture that would be best, but I saw a lot of shifting bodies, fluid things, grotesque monsters and grotesque ships. I lost it at the Wunder and reconfigurable design and the battle with the "grid angel"--just incredible. Except for the bright pink Evangelion piloted by Mari, I loved the new Eva unit designs, though the "beast mode" of EVA-02 is still hard to warm up to. I'm okay with the idea in theory, but the results are always a little goofy-looking, and the new panther-like shape is a bit too much. The new slick black NERV Plug Suits were also very cool.

I don't blame the actual movie for it, but Rebuild of Evangelion 2.0 started a flood of speculation about whether Evangelion was becoming...the series some people felt it always should have been. Some praised what they saw as a more positive direction for the remake, including an allegedly "badass" Shinji who provided the audience with a linear path to self-improvement--because of a single scene where he reached into the voind to try to rescue Rei. Some even went far enough to claim that this was representitive of Hideaki Anno's improved life and greater maturity as an artist, or to imply that a wrong has been corrected, that Evangelion was rightfully compensating for having never given the audience what it wanted.

Look, I'm all for people liking different things and changing their opinions. But I'm going to level: It's aggravating to suggest Evangelion "owed" the audience some kind of feel-good release, some kind of payment for suffering through a story and a protagonist they didn't have a taste for. Stories don't owe their audience a thing: they exist to be told, not to make the viewers feel good. You can't pre-manufature a story to please people anyway, so you might as well go ahead and tell what you like and sort the rest out later.

Me personally, I don't feel Shinji's actions were that far removed from his previous character. He's shown himself capable of fighting back, caring about people, and even going totally postal. I'm a huge fan of Shinji and found him bland in the first two films, was unable to feel that same emotional rapport with the character, but he was really pretty much the same.

It's more the fallout from 2.0 that I object to, the sense of entitlement from the fans, that Shinji would be capital-B better as a John Q. Hero, or that there is an ironclad way to write a Good Story and that Evangelion was correcting itself for failing to do that the first time. There is no formula for creating a perfect story, or a perfect protagonist, and if a story isn't what you want, you shouldn't expect to get anything different.

And yet, I couldn't help but enjoy that the action lauded as an example of Shinji's newfound "badassness" turns out to have had horrible destructive consequences. I don't believe that it's Gainax deliberately screwing with the audience, because I don't know how the actual Japanese audience reacted to these scenes, but it's awesome that things turned out this way. When I saw others get angry at this, I couldn't help but smile.

Shinji in this film is eager to fix things, but also lost in himself and torn with angst. His mannerisms are very similar to the closing bits of the TV series, which this film roughly corresponds to. And the actions he takes, get him into more trouble.

EVA 3.33 is pretty much Shinji's show: other characters get few scenes to themselves.

Misato's emotional abandonment of the returned Shinji is believable. Not nice, not the same, but believable. Even if Misato cheered him on fourteen years ago, Shinji almost caused Third Impact and did enough damage with that "almost" that it would transcend personal feelings...except that Misato had a chance to kill Shinji but hesitated, meaning she still cares for him.

Others later pointed out that not knowing it was actually the real Shinji they retrieved had also influenced the cold attitude of Misato and the rest of Wille, which also made sense. But what I've always loved about Evangelion is that, yes, it lets its characters make mistakes or do bad things.

Kaworu is pretty much the same character as before. He gets more screen time, and more emotive range (with some angry and determined facial expressions), but it doesn't add up to a fuller character. He's there to love Shinji, occassionally say sharply cryptic things, be revealed as an Angel, and die so Shinji can angst about his death. That's all fine, though only time will tell if Kaworu will serve the same thematic purpose that I believe he used to.

Asuka is angry and fights things and still has a crush on Shinji even when she's 28 and hasn't finished puberty yet. There's a sense of impotence to her, but I do miss Asuka's particular mental explosions. Perhaps we will see them later. Remember: Asuka is not a hero, and she is not strong.

Mari still doesn't feel like she serves any purpose, other than being a body to fill a cockpit in battle. Several new named and designed characters are introduced, but they just fill generic personel roles. I still expected a little bit more of Mari than I did of these characters, being how heavily she was marketed, but I'm no longer holding my breath for her to do anything more than act playful and casual regardless of the situation, with a few psychotic outbursts. Maybe she's an ironic take on some anime archetype or another, but she's dull.

Overall? It was a lot of fun. Despite the despair of the story, there was very much a sense of wonder to the entire film, and obvious things that kicked off a weird kind of joy in me. Many of the technical concepts were left mysterious, but I'm content to wait and see if they are further explained. If not all the answers come, I'll be satisfied with what we do have.